6

Dieser Beitrag handelt vom allgemeinen Umgang unsererseits mit Schreibfehlern in Fragen, nicht von einem speziellen, historischen Fall, der nur als Beispiel diente. Bitte respektiert das Thema der Frage.

Es gibt hier oft Fragen, die in der Überschrift einen Schreibfehler enthalten, oder im Fragetext.

Statt den Rechtschreibfehler stillschweigend zu verbessern, und die Frage zu beantworten, wurde die korrekte Schreibung teils zum Hauptthema der Antworten gemacht.

Fehler lenken vom eigentlichen Thema des Fragestellers ab, und eine einmal losgebrochene Diskussion über den Fehler lässt sich nicht mehr eindämmen.

Mein kurzer Appell: Korrigiert in Zukunft bitte solche Fehler sofort. Eventuell kann ein Kommentar hinterlassen werden.

Unten habe ich eine nichtrepräsentative Sammlung von Schreibfehlern aufgelistet - alles von meiner activity/revidions - Seite, lediglich Seite 1 von 5en.


This thread is not about a particular, historic case, but about how to handle spelling mistakes in questions in general. Please respect the topic of the question!

I often encounter questions with spelling mistakes, sometimes even in the headline.

Instead of silently correcting the mistake, and answering the question which was intended, the further discussion often leaves the path, and is mainly about the spelling, why it might went wrong, how to write it instead.

Spelling mistakes distract the concentration from the original question.

I would encourage to correct misspellings in questions, especially headlines immediately, before they get feedback in the content of answers, if the spelling error isn't the central point of the question. When appropriate, you can leave a comment about the correction.

We want to get found for the right term by search engines, and we don't want the discussions to be distracted from the topic, by talking about the error.

Here is a short list (only from page 1 of 5 from my activity/revidions) of such spelling mistakes:

  • 3
    Why the English part is so short compared to the German one? You shouldn't write a summary in English, but the translation, otherwise we cannot understand. – Alenanno Feb 3 '12 at 14:57
  • 4
    You don't need an "excuse" to ask questions. If a question becomes trivial after the correction of an error because it can be easily looked up, closing the question is imho warranted. And this isn't really a problem. It could happen to anyone. – musiKk Feb 3 '12 at 15:33
  • 1
    @Alenanno: You're right. Especially in light of the recent request to use English on meta. – musiKk Feb 3 '12 at 15:36
  • 1
    @musiKk Thanks for translating. You can keep the German version in your comment if you wish, but please include an English one. :D – Alenanno Feb 3 '12 at 15:37
  • @userunknown Ok thanks. – Alenanno Feb 3 '12 at 16:22
  • 1
    @user: I wouldn't say that "schneefall" was a spelling mistake. The tweet just didn't use capital letters, and in the question it is clearly marked as a quotation. – Hendrik Vogt Mar 27 '12 at 9:37
5

I totally agree with user unknown!

So, now my opinion on that topic:

If I read a question like that first, I would correct the misspelling and add a comment pointing out that it is only a typo/misspelling and then I append a link to duden, leo, or whatever.
Next I would vote to close as general reference, since the question is dispensable.

This would have two possible effects:

  1. The question is answered indirect, so the asker will be happy.
  2. The asker does still not know the meaning, but now he can make a new research and/or rephrase his question. If the question is amended in a meaningful way, I will vote to reopen.
  • There is a discrepancy because of the edits. – Alenanno Feb 4 '12 at 11:47
  • I'm sorry, but while you agree with me, you're missing the point, mostly, too. This thread is not about that particular question, but about how to handle such cases in general and from the beginning. Not what to do one year later. It does not depend on the question, whether the question is answered with the spelling correction, nor whether it needs to be closed after being clarified. It is just about errors, which deviate from the question, to avoid distraction. – user unknown Feb 4 '12 at 13:20
  • Auch wenn dies die beste Antwort bislang ist, geht sie doch weitestgehend am Thema vorbei. Es geht mir nicht um diese spezielle Frage, ein Jahr danach, sondern um den allgemeinen Fall, und ganz unabhängig von Fragen, ob diese Threads dann geschlossen werden müßten oder nicht, und ob eine Korrektur die Fragen quasi beantwortet oder nicht, sondern darum, dass man mit einer Korrektur erfolgreich vereitelt, dass der Fehler diskutiert wird, statt der Frage. – user unknown Feb 4 '12 at 13:24
  • @userunknown I understood you right. As I said If I read a question like that first, .... Maybe this is in English grammatic not the correct way to say generally, but this is what I want to say. The sentence was my proposal how to handle questions like the one you linked. – Em1 Feb 4 '12 at 13:26
  • @userunknown Ok, deinen deutschen Text interpretier ich anders, als den englischen. Jetzt bin ich verwirrt :D Aber alles in allem. Wenn der Fehler also vom Erstlesenden korrigiert wird und - wie ich es z.b. vorschlage - behandelt wird, kann es auch nicht zu einer Diskussion kommen! – Em1 Feb 4 '12 at 13:28
  • Der erste Absatz behandelt die Frage, wie mit diesem speziellen Posting jetzt umzugehen ist. Ich glaube ich eröffne einen neuen Thread, wo sich jeder dazu äußern mag - es scheint ja viele zu jucken und zu begeistern, nur meine Frage ist es nicht. Schon die Antwort im nächsten Absatz, dass Du zum Duden linken würdest, missversteht mein Anliegen bzw. schränkt es viel zu sehr ein. Ich meine durchaus alle Rechtschreibfehler in Fragen, deren Diskussion vom eigentlichen Thema ablenken wird, nicht nur Bedeutungsfragen. Ob die Frage ansonsten geschlossen gehört ist überhaupt nicht mein Thema. – user unknown Feb 4 '12 at 16:15
  • @Em1: Your first paragraph deals with the "schäckern" question, (which I eliminated completly from my question, now), and how to handle it now. That's not my theme. And then you tell us, that you would link to the Duden, but my question isn't restricted to question which deal about translations. I talk about correcting all spelling mistakes (if not intentional), because they can deviate from the topic at hand. What the consequences might be is a different thing and off topic here, please. – user unknown Feb 4 '12 at 16:22
  • If you want to discuss the particular case, please use this alternative thread: meta.german.stackexchange.com/q/336/266 – user unknown Feb 4 '12 at 17:07
  • @userunknown Ich hab den Hinweis (es war nur ein Hinweis) gelöscht. Der Rest ist und bleibt so, weil es in keinster Weise off-topic ist, sondern eben ein Vorschlag, wie man solche Fragen generell und ganz allgemeingültig behandeln kann (nicht muss) und die Konsequenzen habe ich nur genannt, um jedem klar zu machen, dass es eine seriöse Möglichkeit ist. – Em1 Feb 4 '12 at 17:49
  • The asker does still not know the meaning, ist eine Antwort, die sich nur auf den Schäcker-Fall bezieht - womöglich auf weitere, bei denen nach einer Übersetzung gefragt wird. Es geht aber überhaupt nicht um Übersetzungen, sondern um unbeabsichtigte Rechtschreibfehler in Überschriften allgemein. Absurderweise findet hier genau das statt, was ich beklage, dass sich mit Themen beschäftigt wird, die gar nicht Gegenstand der Frage sind. Thema verfehlt. – user unknown Feb 4 '12 at 19:02
  • The asker does still not know the meaning, is an answer, which only makes sense for the schäcker question, probably on other translation questions. But my concern insn't translation questions, but spelling errors in headlines in general. Absurdly we find right here in this discussion the same pattern I worry about: The answers deal with themes which aren't asked. Off topic. – user unknown Feb 4 '12 at 19:06
4

About the special case you've mentioned in your question, the OP is asking about a word which is a typo. From the example, it's quite obvious that what the correct spelling should be.

When you edit the question by correcting the typo, then the answers are not valid anymore because both answers pointed out that the correct spelling should be something else in this context. So I don't agree with you on this.

  • 2
    +1 If the point of the question is a typo, you don't correct the typo, otherwise not only the answers, but the question itself wouldn't have to be there. – Alenanno Feb 3 '12 at 15:36
  • @Alenanno: Exactly my point. – user508 Feb 3 '12 at 15:39
  • I was agreeing with you, I forgot to write I voted you up! :D – Alenanno Feb 3 '12 at 15:40
  • 1
    @Alenanno: I guessed so, because normally everyone agrees with me. :P – user508 Feb 3 '12 at 15:43
  • First of all, it's not a typo, as you can see, since he or she repeated the error 2 times, and made the same error on dict.leo.org. If something has ever clearly a spelling mistake, which is not a typo, this is. -- Wenn irgendetwas je kein klarer Tippfehler war, dann ja wohl das! 3x beim Fragen vertippt man sich nicht, plus der Fehler bei leo. – user unknown Feb 3 '12 at 15:59
  • @userunknown: I didn't say it's the OP's typo. There are many possibilities, maybe the OP saw the sentence somewhere, he/she heard it, etc. – user508 Feb 3 '12 at 16:02
  • 2. Bedaure ich ja, dass es zu den Antworten längst gekommen ist, und verstehe, dass Ihr Eure wertvolle Reputation von 150 Punkten nicht verlieren wollt, und habe daher betont, dass dies ein Beispiel sei, und vorgeschlagen wie in Zukunft damit umgegangen werden soll. Also keine Sorge! Es geht um ähnliche Fälle in Zukunft, nicht um diesen. Die Antwort ist off-topic und gehört geschlossen. – user unknown Feb 3 '12 at 16:03
  • 2. The Question is about the way we handle such errors in general, not this particular one. Feel comfortable about your reputation. The answer is off topic, and I will flag it as such. – user unknown Feb 3 '12 at 16:06
  • @Gigili: Don't play games with the questions whom's typo it was, if it wasn't a typo at all. C and K don't lay beneath on the keyboard, so if the user has adopted the error from someone else, it has surely not been a typo before. -- Fang doch nicht an Ausflüchte zu suchen, wessen Tippfehler es gewesen sei, wo nichts dafür spricht, dass es einer sein könnte. C und K liegen auf der Tastatur nun wahrlich weit auseinander. Selbst wenn der User das Wort übernommen hat, kennt er die korrekte Schreibung nicht und also ist es schlicht ein Rechtschreibfehler, der auf Unwissen beruht. – user unknown Feb 3 '12 at 16:18
  • 3
    @userunknown If the OP is asking about a problem and the problem is the spelling, you can't correct the question, otherwise both the question and answers won't make any sense to future readers. This is regardless if it's a typo or it the OP copied it wrong/know it wrong/etc... – Alenanno Feb 3 '12 at 17:04
  • @Alenanno: No, the OP is just an example. I'm not interesting in handling this nearly one year old question, which went on top yesterday for some reason, where I immediately stumbled upon the spelling mistake, corrected it, made a comment, and then realized that the answers did not only answer the question, but discussed the spelling error, which is, IMHO, off topic. The future way to handle this should be, to correct errors in the headline immediately. Maybe the question is senseless then, like in this example, so it should be closed (trivial translation). The OPs question was the meaning – user unknown Feb 3 '12 at 17:39
  • @Alenanno: Das Problem des Fragestellers war gerade nicht die Schreibung, sondern die Bedeutung, nur hätte er die Bedeutung mit richtiger Schreibung leicht selbst gefunden. Meine Frage handelt aber von dieser Frage nur insofern, als mir diese als Beispiel dient zu fordern, solche Schreibfehler im Titel sofort zu korrigieren, bevor andere in ihren Antworten darauf rumreiten, ohne dass es gefragt war. Deswegen ist Gigilis Antwort off topic; diese behandelt den Beispielfall, nicht das allgemeine Vorgehen. – user unknown Feb 3 '12 at 17:44
  • 1
    @userunknown: Same thing holds for same situations, you shouldn't edit them. – user508 Feb 3 '12 at 17:52
  • @Gigili: I don't understand how you may think, that my appellation to correct spelling errors before answers problemize them, can be answered by your answer answers will be invalid. Did you even read my question? -- Wie kannst Du annehmen, die Antwort, dass gegebene Antworten dadurch ungültig würden, würde meinen Appell, man möge die Frage korrigieren bevor sich Antworten auf den Fehler beziehen, beantworten? Hast Du meine Frage überhaupt gelesen? – user unknown Feb 3 '12 at 18:26
  • @Gigili: Please move your answer to this question: meta.german.stackexchange.com/q/336/266 which I opened just for you, since you don't like to discuss my question, but a different one. I tried to ask this different one question. Please delete your off-topic answer here. Thank you. – user unknown Feb 4 '12 at 16:59
1

... aber im Zweifelsfall korrigieren, auch wegen der Suchmaschinen.
... correct the title if in doubt, also because of the search engines.

I do not know, why you haven't translated that part, but it is an important one for this topic.

If this is a common mistake, then people do not find the correct meaning/translation, because the dictionaries normally only list the correct spellings. But now, with our question here, there is a correction for a common problem.

The search engines find us because of the incorrect spelling in the question and because of the correct spelling in the answers. So in this special case I agree with Gigili, that we should keep the error in the title. People can find out that they make a spelling error and can look up the meaning at the same time.

  • Do you know how the search engines work? Don't they rank something in the title more important, which even get's displayed in the Frame title? How do you know the error is common? Are people, doing it wrong, more important than people searching for the right term? Isn't it annoying, if the discussions handle about the error, instead of the content of the question? It's just noise, with a limited benefit. If you google for "schäckern", it get's automatically corrected: Showing results for schäkern/Search instead for schäckern. – user unknown Feb 3 '12 at 18:39
  • Weißt Du wie Suchmaschinen arbeiten? Bewerten sie Überschriften nicht besonders stark, insbesondere, wenn es selbst den Rahmentitel schmückt? Woher weißt Du, dass die Fehler häufig sind? Sind Leute die nach der falschen Schreibung suchen wichtiger, als die, die nach der richtigen suchen? Ist es nicht nervig, wenn die Diskussionen von Debatten über den Fehler vom Thema abgelenkt werden? Es ist nur störend mit fraglichem Nutzen. Googelt nan nach "schäckern", wird es automatisch zu Showing results for schäkern/Search instead for schäckern korrigiert. – user unknown Feb 3 '12 at 18:43
  • 2
    Well, @userunknown, I'm a programmer, believe it or not. And if the title is weighted more or not, is totally uninteresting. "schäckern" has 6690 hits on my test run, and well, I call that common. And why you do not want to help people who misspelled things (the Google correction obviously did not help our asker), I do not understand. – John Smithers Feb 3 '12 at 19:04
  • It's not the question whether I like to help the asker. Note, that the question was about the meaning of the word, and it was misspelled. I would answer the question, and correct the misspelling. In that particular case, the question is not appropriate for our community and would be closed, maybe later deleted, but the asker would have got his answer meanwhile. If simple translation requests are void, why should they get valid by misspelling? – user unknown Feb 3 '12 at 19:11
  • Wer sagt ich würde nicht antworten wollen? Im Gegenteil: Der Fehler lenkt von der Frage ab; ich aber will mich auf die Frage konzentrieren und dafür den Fehler rasch kaschieren. Im konkreten Fall ist die Frage als einfache Übersetzungsanfrage ungültig, und würde rasch gelöscht, aber der Frager hätte seine Antwort unterdessen erhalten. – user unknown Feb 3 '12 at 19:14
  • 2
    @userunknown: First: Keep it English, this is Meta and you make this thread unnecessarily long. Second, I did not mean just the OP, I meant the people who misspell things. You only help one of them. – John Smithers Feb 3 '12 at 21:12
  • For those who don't speak English, this isn't unneccessary. Please don't discriminate people who don't speak English. To the content of your question: If you would take this idea seriously, we would add all sorts of misspelling for every question, not just those, where the misspelling happened randomly. I'm astonished, what a curious idea that is! – user unknown Feb 3 '12 at 22:47
  • Für die, die nicht gut Englisch sprechen, ist dies mitnichten unnötig. Bitte diskriminiert nicht diejenigen, die kein Englisch können. Zum Inhalt: Wenn man die Idee ernstnähme, dann müsste man bei allen Fragen absichtlich ein paar Fehlschreibungen einbauen, um Leuten zu helfen, die es möglicherweise falsch schreiben. Eine abenteurliche Idee! – user unknown Feb 3 '12 at 22:52
  • If you don't want to discuss the general question, how to handle spelling mistakes, but this particular one, please use this alternative thread: meta.german.stackexchange.com/q/336/266 – user unknown Feb 4 '12 at 17:03
0

Off-topic, perhaps, but I am hesitant to edit someone else's question to correct an obvious typo. For example, there was the recent pithy and humorous "Aussetzer" answer. There was an extra "einen" left in there by mistake. I felt uncomfortable editing and correcting this, because then my name appears in front of the answerer. The way I feel, it would have made my very minor edit appear to be of equal importance to the answerer's... and I did not want that. I then looked for a button to send the answerer a private message but could not find one.

  • If you aren't sure, whether an correction is welcome, do a comment, and ask the author to correct it himself. If there is no doubt, that the author would do the correction, do him a flavor and do it yourself. You don't steal importance. If the error is too minor, forget about it. Btw.: an extra word is not a typo. This discussion here is not about answers, but about questions, which appear on the front page, and mainly about questions, so yes, your comment is off-topic. If an answer is off topic, make it a comment or start a new question. – user unknown Mar 21 '12 at 20:26
  • 2
    That's how all SE sites work best. All users try together to make the best of the content. If you spot an error - correct it. I usually wait some time to give the OP a chance. But if they don't take it I edit without further asking. If I made something wrong they can always roll back the edit. – Takkat Mar 21 '12 at 20:36
  • I don't see any problem with what you mentioned. Personally I welcome if someone corrects my mistakes. Often I don't recognize my own mistakes (I read what I think not what is really written, you know?) And if you or someone else correct it for me you do me a favor. So, if you find any texts that need improvement correct them as soon as you detect the mistakes. – Em1 Mar 22 '12 at 13:16
-1

Ok, after some thought my opinion is that the question must be closed for the simple fact that I tried searching the wrong spelling and the right spelling was suggested, look at the table in the center, under the field "Informationen aus dem Umfeld der Suche" on the right.

The spelling is suggested.

To me this is the proof that the OP didn't try to search actively or maybe that it just ignored it. Concerning the spelling, I disagree with user unknown when he says we must correct it, because it's central to the point of the question. Future visitors must understand that he searched the wrong word, otherwise it makes no sense.

I'd leave it to the original form, so future visitors will understand. I can't rollback, but I suggest someone to change it back to the first revision made by Gigili, where only the formatting was changed.

Edit added from the comments: my suggestion is the same for other cases. Peculiar cases will require further analysis. But I'd do the same in other cases. If the mistake is a central part of the question, you shouldn't edit it, otherwise you affect the meaning of the question and this is not allowed. If it's a typo that won't affect the meaning of the question, you can edit it. If a quick and easy search reveals the answer, close the question.

  • Please understand that this thread is not a discussion about what should be done with this particular thread, which is only an example, but how we behave in the general case of misspellings in the question title. Your answer is off topic for my question. If you like to discuss the problem of the "schäckern"-Thread in depth, please open a new thread; it's allowed, it's easy, there is no reason to hijack my thread. – user unknown Feb 4 '12 at 12:57
  • 1
    @userunknown No hijacking: my suggestion is the same. Peculiar cases will require further analysis. But I'd do the same in other cases. If the mistake is a central part of the question, you shouldn't edit it, otherwise you affect the meaning of the question and this is not allowed. If it's a typo that won't affect the meaning of the question, you can edit it. If a quick and easy search reveals the answer, close the question. – Alenanno Feb 4 '12 at 13:01
  • Kann bitte mal jemand verstehen, dass es mir nicht um den "schäckern"-Beitrag geht, sondern um einen allgemeinen Umgang mit Schreibfehlern in Fragen, insbesondere dem Titel der Frage? Der Beitrag war nur ein Beispiel. Deine Antwort ist keine Antwort auf meine Frage, und daher off-topic. Bitte diskutier in einem eigenen Thread die Details des Umgangs mit dem "schäckern"-Thread; Du hast das Recht dafür einen neuen Thread zu erstellen, und es ist gar nicht so schwer. – user unknown Feb 4 '12 at 13:01
  • If you don't want to discuss the general question, how to handle spelling mistakes, but this particular one, please use this alternative thread: meta.german.stackexchange.com/q/336/266 Please move off-topic parts of your answer from this thread. Thank you. – user unknown Feb 4 '12 at 17:05
  • 1
    @userunknown Read my last comment and my answer carefully. I'll post there too, though. – Alenanno Feb 4 '12 at 17:07
  • 1st paragraph: that the question must be closed is an Answer to the schäckern-question only, since there is no reason to close a question for a spelling mistake. proof that the OP didn't try in the second paragraph: again off topic. 3rd paragraph: I'd leave it to the original form - again to the schäckern-topic, not to general spelling errors in headlines. If you don't edit or delete your post yourself, I have to flag it for moderator attention. – user unknown Feb 4 '12 at 18:56
  • 1
    I don't agree with you Alennano. If we should close the question, so what's the difference between SE and an online dictionary? The person didn't know it includes a misspelling. I think it's not fair to close questions like that. – user508 Feb 5 '12 at 20:52
  • @Gigili I understand that, but that person didn't even try to look. A simple eye-searching would have revealed that the spelling was suggested. I understood it without even reading. But anyway, this is my opinion, if no-one agrees with me, the question will stay open, but this is my judgement. :D – Alenanno Feb 5 '12 at 20:56

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .